Nestle - The Most Unethical Company In The World
Discussion
I might get on my horse here a bit, cus i do from time to time, so apologies in advance..........
Nestlé holds about 50% of the world's breast milk substitute market and is being boycotted for continued breaches of the 1981 WHO Code regulating the marketing of breast milk substitutes.
Nestlé encourages bottle feeding primarily by either giving away free samples of baby milk to hospitals, or neglecting to collect payments. It has been criticised for misinforming mothers and health workers in promotional literature. Nestlé implies that malnourished mothers, and mothers of twins and premature babies are unable to breastfeed, despite health organisations claims that there is no evidence to support this.
Evidence of direct advertising to mothers has been found in over twenty countries such as South Africa and Thailand. Instructions and health warnings on packaging are often either absent, not prominently displayed or in an inappropriate language. All of these actions directly contravene the Code regulating the marketing of baby milk formulas.
Even in the UK, bottle-fed babies are up to ten times more likely to develop gastro intestinal infections, but in the Third World, where clean water may be absent, mothers may be illiterate and independent health care and advice may be lacking, bottle feeding can be more dangerous. This can lead to a situation where bavies are left vulnerable to dysentery, malnutrition and death, and Nestle is able to retain its estimated $4 billion market share in the baby-milk industry.
Exploiting employees
In 1989 workers at a Nestlé chocolate plant in Cacapava, Brazil went on strike. The wprkers compained of poor working conditions, including discrimination against women, lack of protective clothing and inadequate safety condition. Within two months of the beginning of the stike the company had sacked forty of its workers, including most of the strike organisers.
Supporting brutal / repressive regimes
Nestlé has subsidiaries in Brazil, China, Colombia, Egypt, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Senegal, Sri Lanka and Turkey. The company also has subsidaries in South Africa which it owned during the Apartheid year. L'Oréal adds Peru and Morocco to the list.
Abusing animals
Nestlé own nearly 50% of the cosmetics company L'Oreal. L'Oreal was subject to boycott calls from animal rights groups including PeTA because of its animal testing policy. Since then L'Oreal has claimed that it no longer tests finished products on animals. This statement is obviously intended to mislead since finished products do not require further testing and it implies that the ingredients are certainly still subject to tests. Some groups called off the boycott in response to L'Oreals' claims, however there are individuals and organisations who continue the boycott and L'Oreal continues to test on animals.
Nestlé itself manufactures products containing meat and has been critised by BUAV for testing its coffee's carcinogenicity on mice.
I would welcome any more rants, the more the better............
Nestlé holds about 50% of the world's breast milk substitute market and is being boycotted for continued breaches of the 1981 WHO Code regulating the marketing of breast milk substitutes.
Nestlé encourages bottle feeding primarily by either giving away free samples of baby milk to hospitals, or neglecting to collect payments. It has been criticised for misinforming mothers and health workers in promotional literature. Nestlé implies that malnourished mothers, and mothers of twins and premature babies are unable to breastfeed, despite health organisations claims that there is no evidence to support this.
Evidence of direct advertising to mothers has been found in over twenty countries such as South Africa and Thailand. Instructions and health warnings on packaging are often either absent, not prominently displayed or in an inappropriate language. All of these actions directly contravene the Code regulating the marketing of baby milk formulas.
Even in the UK, bottle-fed babies are up to ten times more likely to develop gastro intestinal infections, but in the Third World, where clean water may be absent, mothers may be illiterate and independent health care and advice may be lacking, bottle feeding can be more dangerous. This can lead to a situation where bavies are left vulnerable to dysentery, malnutrition and death, and Nestle is able to retain its estimated $4 billion market share in the baby-milk industry.
Exploiting employees
In 1989 workers at a Nestlé chocolate plant in Cacapava, Brazil went on strike. The wprkers compained of poor working conditions, including discrimination against women, lack of protective clothing and inadequate safety condition. Within two months of the beginning of the stike the company had sacked forty of its workers, including most of the strike organisers.
Supporting brutal / repressive regimes
Nestlé has subsidiaries in Brazil, China, Colombia, Egypt, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Senegal, Sri Lanka and Turkey. The company also has subsidaries in South Africa which it owned during the Apartheid year. L'Oréal adds Peru and Morocco to the list.
Abusing animals
Nestlé own nearly 50% of the cosmetics company L'Oreal. L'Oreal was subject to boycott calls from animal rights groups including PeTA because of its animal testing policy. Since then L'Oreal has claimed that it no longer tests finished products on animals. This statement is obviously intended to mislead since finished products do not require further testing and it implies that the ingredients are certainly still subject to tests. Some groups called off the boycott in response to L'Oreals' claims, however there are individuals and organisations who continue the boycott and L'Oreal continues to test on animals.
Nestlé itself manufactures products containing meat and has been critised by BUAV for testing its coffee's carcinogenicity on mice.
I would welcome any more rants, the more the better............
peta are a bunch of idiots, although they do produce some good porn occasionally. To be honest, kids snuffing it from breast milk substitute in the 3rd world is probably the least of their problems, plus theres too many of them anyway.
Shock horror, 3rd world countries manufacturing regs arent up to scratch, thats why its cheap and its the only reason these places have any industry outside of building mud huts and banana farming anyway.
Go cry me a river somewhere else.
Shock horror, 3rd world countries manufacturing regs arent up to scratch, thats why its cheap and its the only reason these places have any industry outside of building mud huts and banana farming anyway.
Go cry me a river somewhere else.
deevlash said:
peta are a bunch of idiots, although they do produce some good porn occasionally. To be honest, kids snuffing it from breast milk substitute in the 3rd world is probably the least of their problems, plus theres too many of them anyway.
Shock horror, 3rd world countries manufacturing regs arent up to scratch, thats why its cheap and its the only reason these places have any industry outside of building mud huts and banana farming anyway.
Go cry me a river somewhere else.
In the most polite voice, that is why attrocities of any proportion exist in todays society, 3rd world of otherwise, whether it be humanity at risk or it's existence in what ever form that may be.Shock horror, 3rd world countries manufacturing regs arent up to scratch, thats why its cheap and its the only reason these places have any industry outside of building mud huts and banana farming anyway.
Go cry me a river somewhere else.
But thanks for your insight it has been noted and digested...........
Horrible as animal testing is, for those of us with contact allergies the products that come from animal testing are a god send, I was given a list of products I "should boycott" when I was at uni and several of them were ones that I have to use as previous swaps to rival products lead to pretty bad allergic reactions. Yes it's selfish, but you try living with blistered, itching, inflamed skin for most of your life and then preach to me about animal testing.
t loads of money but that breastmilk thing does fairly take the pissMentalSarcasm said:
Horrible as animal testing is, for those of us with contact allergies the products that come from animal testing are a god send, I was given a list of products I "should boycott" when I was at uni and several of them were ones that I have to use as previous swaps to rival products lead to pretty bad allergic reactions. Yes it's selfish, but you try living with blistered, itching, inflamed skin for most of your life and then preach to me about animal testing.
I do actually sympathise with your condition, and believe that ever effort should be taken to reduce animal testing wherever possible, and understand why it has happened to date.Try this ....
http://www.mattek.com/?ga-atm&gclid=CImRwu6ivp...
Things are happening and comdenation of poor practice should still be exercised legally and with discipline, I'm not advocating PeTa's tactics as they do subscribe to some radical practices, but the heart is there.......
RupertTheFridge said:
deevlash said:
peta are a bunch of idiots, although they do produce some good porn occasionally. To be honest, kids snuffing it from breast milk substitute in the 3rd world is probably the least of their problems, plus theres too many of them anyway.
Shock horror, 3rd world countries manufacturing regs arent up to scratch, thats why its cheap and its the only reason these places have any industry outside of building mud huts and banana farming anyway.
Go cry me a river somewhere else.
In the most polite voice, that is why attrocities of any proportion exist in todays society, 3rd world of otherwise, whether it be humanity at risk or it's existence in what ever form that may be.Shock horror, 3rd world countries manufacturing regs arent up to scratch, thats why its cheap and its the only reason these places have any industry outside of building mud huts and banana farming anyway.
Go cry me a river somewhere else.
But thanks for your insight it has been noted and digested...........
Healey73 said:
RupertTheFridge said:
Abusing animals
Nestlé own nearly 50% of the cosmetics company L'Oreal.
Things may have changed but the last I knew that shareholding of L'Oreal was much smaller than 50%. Either way 'I'm out'Nestlé own nearly 50% of the cosmetics company L'Oreal.
RupertTheFridge said:
I might get on my horse here a bit, cus i do from time to time, so apologies in advance..........
Nestlé holds about 50% of the world's breast milk substitute market and is being boycotted for continued breaches of the 1981 WHO Code regulating the marketing of breast milk substitutes.
Nestlé encourages bottle feeding primarily by either giving away free samples of baby milk to hospitals, or neglecting to collect payments. It has been criticised for misinforming mothers and health workers in promotional literature. Nestlé implies that malnourished mothers, and mothers of twins and premature babies are unable to breastfeed, despite health organisations claims that there is no evidence to support this.
Evidence of direct advertising to mothers has been found in over twenty countries such as South Africa and Thailand. Instructions and health warnings on packaging are often either absent, not prominently displayed or in an inappropriate language. All of these actions directly contravene the Code regulating the marketing of baby milk formulas.
Even in the UK, bottle-fed babies are up to ten times more likely to develop gastro intestinal infections, but in the Third World, where clean water may be absent, mothers may be illiterate and independent health care and advice may be lacking, bottle feeding can be more dangerous. This can lead to a situation where bavies are left vulnerable to dysentery, malnutrition and death, and Nestle is able to retain its estimated $4 billion market share in the baby-milk industry.
Exploiting employees
In 1989 workers at a Nestlé chocolate plant in Cacapava, Brazil went on strike. The wprkers compained of poor working conditions, including discrimination against women, lack of protective clothing and inadequate safety condition. Within two months of the beginning of the stike the company had sacked forty of its workers, including most of the strike organisers.
Supporting brutal / repressive regimes
Nestlé has subsidiaries in Brazil, China, Colombia, Egypt, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Senegal, Sri Lanka and Turkey. The company also has subsidaries in South Africa which it owned during the Apartheid year. L'Oréal adds Peru and Morocco to the list.
Abusing animals
Nestlé own nearly 50% of the cosmetics company L'Oreal. L'Oreal was subject to boycott calls from animal rights groups including PeTA because of its animal testing policy. Since then L'Oreal has claimed that it no longer tests finished products on animals. This statement is obviously intended to mislead since finished products do not require further testing and it implies that the ingredients are certainly still subject to tests. Some groups called off the boycott in response to L'Oreals' claims, however there are individuals and organisations who continue the boycott and L'Oreal continues to test on animals.
Nestlé itself manufactures products containing meat and has been critised by BUAV for testing its coffee's carcinogenicity on mice.
I would welcome any more rants, the more the better............
Are you volunteering for the next coffee testing round? I completely support your policy of putting yourself in place of the mouse. Very decent of you old bean.Nestlé holds about 50% of the world's breast milk substitute market and is being boycotted for continued breaches of the 1981 WHO Code regulating the marketing of breast milk substitutes.
Nestlé encourages bottle feeding primarily by either giving away free samples of baby milk to hospitals, or neglecting to collect payments. It has been criticised for misinforming mothers and health workers in promotional literature. Nestlé implies that malnourished mothers, and mothers of twins and premature babies are unable to breastfeed, despite health organisations claims that there is no evidence to support this.
Evidence of direct advertising to mothers has been found in over twenty countries such as South Africa and Thailand. Instructions and health warnings on packaging are often either absent, not prominently displayed or in an inappropriate language. All of these actions directly contravene the Code regulating the marketing of baby milk formulas.
Even in the UK, bottle-fed babies are up to ten times more likely to develop gastro intestinal infections, but in the Third World, where clean water may be absent, mothers may be illiterate and independent health care and advice may be lacking, bottle feeding can be more dangerous. This can lead to a situation where bavies are left vulnerable to dysentery, malnutrition and death, and Nestle is able to retain its estimated $4 billion market share in the baby-milk industry.
Exploiting employees
In 1989 workers at a Nestlé chocolate plant in Cacapava, Brazil went on strike. The wprkers compained of poor working conditions, including discrimination against women, lack of protective clothing and inadequate safety condition. Within two months of the beginning of the stike the company had sacked forty of its workers, including most of the strike organisers.
Supporting brutal / repressive regimes
Nestlé has subsidiaries in Brazil, China, Colombia, Egypt, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Senegal, Sri Lanka and Turkey. The company also has subsidaries in South Africa which it owned during the Apartheid year. L'Oréal adds Peru and Morocco to the list.
Abusing animals
Nestlé own nearly 50% of the cosmetics company L'Oreal. L'Oreal was subject to boycott calls from animal rights groups including PeTA because of its animal testing policy. Since then L'Oreal has claimed that it no longer tests finished products on animals. This statement is obviously intended to mislead since finished products do not require further testing and it implies that the ingredients are certainly still subject to tests. Some groups called off the boycott in response to L'Oreals' claims, however there are individuals and organisations who continue the boycott and L'Oreal continues to test on animals.
Nestlé itself manufactures products containing meat and has been critised by BUAV for testing its coffee's carcinogenicity on mice.
I would welcome any more rants, the more the better............
Edited by drivin_me_nuts on Thursday 23 October 22:32
RupertTheFridge said:
I might get on my horse here a bit, cus i do from time to time, so apologies in advance..........
Nestlé holds about 50% of the world's breast milk substitute market and is being boycotted for continued breaches of the 1981 WHO Code regulating the marketing of breast milk substitutes.
Nestlé encourages bottle feeding primarily by either giving away free samples of baby milk to hospitals, or neglecting to collect payments. It has been criticised for misinforming mothers and health workers in promotional literature. Nestlé implies that malnourished mothers, and mothers of twins and premature babies are unable to breastfeed, despite health organisations claims that there is no evidence to support this.
Evidence of direct advertising to mothers has been found in over twenty countries such as South Africa and Thailand. Instructions and health warnings on packaging are often either absent, not prominently displayed or in an inappropriate language. All of these actions directly contravene the Code regulating the marketing of baby milk formulas.
Even in the UK, bottle-fed babies are up to ten times more likely to develop gastro intestinal infections, but in the Third World, where clean water may be absent, mothers may be illiterate and independent health care and advice may be lacking, bottle feeding can be more dangerous. This can lead to a situation where bavies are left vulnerable to dysentery, malnutrition and death, and Nestle is able to retain its estimated $4 billion market share in the baby-milk industry.
Exploiting employees
In 1989 workers at a Nestlé chocolate plant in Cacapava, Brazil went on strike. The wprkers compained of poor working conditions, including discrimination against women, lack of protective clothing and inadequate safety condition. Within two months of the beginning of the stike the company had sacked forty of its workers, including most of the strike organisers.
Supporting brutal / repressive regimes
Nestlé has subsidiaries in Brazil, China, Colombia, Egypt, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Senegal, Sri Lanka and Turkey. The company also has subsidaries in South Africa which it owned during the Apartheid year. L'Oréal adds Peru and Morocco to the list.
Abusing animals
Nestlé own nearly 50% of the cosmetics company L'Oreal. L'Oreal was subject to boycott calls from animal rights groups including PeTA because of its animal testing policy. Since then L'Oreal has claimed that it no longer tests finished products on animals. This statement is obviously intended to mislead since finished products do not require further testing and it implies that the ingredients are certainly still subject to tests. Some groups called off the boycott in response to L'Oreals' claims, however there are individuals and organisations who continue the boycott and L'Oreal continues to test on animals.
Nestlé itself manufactures products containing meat and has been critised by BUAV for testing its coffee's carcinogenicity on mice.
I would welcome any more rants, the more the better............
Just out of interest. How old is the information above?Nestlé holds about 50% of the world's breast milk substitute market and is being boycotted for continued breaches of the 1981 WHO Code regulating the marketing of breast milk substitutes.
Nestlé encourages bottle feeding primarily by either giving away free samples of baby milk to hospitals, or neglecting to collect payments. It has been criticised for misinforming mothers and health workers in promotional literature. Nestlé implies that malnourished mothers, and mothers of twins and premature babies are unable to breastfeed, despite health organisations claims that there is no evidence to support this.
Evidence of direct advertising to mothers has been found in over twenty countries such as South Africa and Thailand. Instructions and health warnings on packaging are often either absent, not prominently displayed or in an inappropriate language. All of these actions directly contravene the Code regulating the marketing of baby milk formulas.
Even in the UK, bottle-fed babies are up to ten times more likely to develop gastro intestinal infections, but in the Third World, where clean water may be absent, mothers may be illiterate and independent health care and advice may be lacking, bottle feeding can be more dangerous. This can lead to a situation where bavies are left vulnerable to dysentery, malnutrition and death, and Nestle is able to retain its estimated $4 billion market share in the baby-milk industry.
Exploiting employees
In 1989 workers at a Nestlé chocolate plant in Cacapava, Brazil went on strike. The wprkers compained of poor working conditions, including discrimination against women, lack of protective clothing and inadequate safety condition. Within two months of the beginning of the stike the company had sacked forty of its workers, including most of the strike organisers.
Supporting brutal / repressive regimes
Nestlé has subsidiaries in Brazil, China, Colombia, Egypt, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Senegal, Sri Lanka and Turkey. The company also has subsidaries in South Africa which it owned during the Apartheid year. L'Oréal adds Peru and Morocco to the list.
Abusing animals
Nestlé own nearly 50% of the cosmetics company L'Oreal. L'Oreal was subject to boycott calls from animal rights groups including PeTA because of its animal testing policy. Since then L'Oreal has claimed that it no longer tests finished products on animals. This statement is obviously intended to mislead since finished products do not require further testing and it implies that the ingredients are certainly still subject to tests. Some groups called off the boycott in response to L'Oreals' claims, however there are individuals and organisations who continue the boycott and L'Oreal continues to test on animals.
Nestlé itself manufactures products containing meat and has been critised by BUAV for testing its coffee's carcinogenicity on mice.
I would welcome any more rants, the more the better............
I remember reading that about 10 million years ago and it was out quite of date even then.
drivin_me_nuts said:
RupertTheFridge said:
I might get on my horse here a bit, cus i do from time to time, so apologies in advance..........
Nestlé holds about 50% of the world's breast milk substitute market and is being boycotted for continued breaches of the 1981 WHO Code regulating the marketing of breast milk substitutes.
Nestlé encourages bottle feeding primarily by either giving away free samples of baby milk to hospitals, or neglecting to collect payments. It has been criticised for misinforming mothers and health workers in promotional literature. Nestlé implies that malnourished mothers, and mothers of twins and premature babies are unable to breastfeed, despite health organisations claims that there is no evidence to support this.
Evidence of direct advertising to mothers has been found in over twenty countries such as South Africa and Thailand. Instructions and health warnings on packaging are often either absent, not prominently displayed or in an inappropriate language. All of these actions directly contravene the Code regulating the marketing of baby milk formulas.
Even in the UK, bottle-fed babies are up to ten times more likely to develop gastro intestinal infections, but in the Third World, where clean water may be absent, mothers may be illiterate and independent health care and advice may be lacking, bottle feeding can be more dangerous. This can lead to a situation where bavies are left vulnerable to dysentery, malnutrition and death, and Nestle is able to retain its estimated $4 billion market share in the baby-milk industry.
Exploiting employees
In 1989 workers at a Nestlé chocolate plant in Cacapava, Brazil went on strike. The wprkers compained of poor working conditions, including discrimination against women, lack of protective clothing and inadequate safety condition. Within two months of the beginning of the stike the company had sacked forty of its workers, including most of the strike organisers.
Supporting brutal / repressive regimes
Nestlé has subsidiaries in Brazil, China, Colombia, Egypt, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Senegal, Sri Lanka and Turkey. The company also has subsidaries in South Africa which it owned during the Apartheid year. L'Oréal adds Peru and Morocco to the list.
Abusing animals
Nestlé own nearly 50% of the cosmetics company L'Oreal. L'Oreal was subject to boycott calls from animal rights groups including PeTA because of its animal testing policy. Since then L'Oreal has claimed that it no longer tests finished products on animals. This statement is obviously intended to mislead since finished products do not require further testing and it implies that the ingredients are certainly still subject to tests. Some groups called off the boycott in response to L'Oreals' claims, however there are individuals and organisations who continue the boycott and L'Oreal continues to test on animals.
Nestlé itself manufactures products containing meat and has been critised by BUAV for testing its coffee's carcinogenicity on mice.
I would welcome any more rants, the more the better............
Are you volunteering for the next coffee testing round? I completely support your policy of putting yourself in place of the mouse. Very decent of you old bean.Nestlé holds about 50% of the world's breast milk substitute market and is being boycotted for continued breaches of the 1981 WHO Code regulating the marketing of breast milk substitutes.
Nestlé encourages bottle feeding primarily by either giving away free samples of baby milk to hospitals, or neglecting to collect payments. It has been criticised for misinforming mothers and health workers in promotional literature. Nestlé implies that malnourished mothers, and mothers of twins and premature babies are unable to breastfeed, despite health organisations claims that there is no evidence to support this.
Evidence of direct advertising to mothers has been found in over twenty countries such as South Africa and Thailand. Instructions and health warnings on packaging are often either absent, not prominently displayed or in an inappropriate language. All of these actions directly contravene the Code regulating the marketing of baby milk formulas.
Even in the UK, bottle-fed babies are up to ten times more likely to develop gastro intestinal infections, but in the Third World, where clean water may be absent, mothers may be illiterate and independent health care and advice may be lacking, bottle feeding can be more dangerous. This can lead to a situation where bavies are left vulnerable to dysentery, malnutrition and death, and Nestle is able to retain its estimated $4 billion market share in the baby-milk industry.
Exploiting employees
In 1989 workers at a Nestlé chocolate plant in Cacapava, Brazil went on strike. The wprkers compained of poor working conditions, including discrimination against women, lack of protective clothing and inadequate safety condition. Within two months of the beginning of the stike the company had sacked forty of its workers, including most of the strike organisers.
Supporting brutal / repressive regimes
Nestlé has subsidiaries in Brazil, China, Colombia, Egypt, El Salvador, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, Senegal, Sri Lanka and Turkey. The company also has subsidaries in South Africa which it owned during the Apartheid year. L'Oréal adds Peru and Morocco to the list.
Abusing animals
Nestlé own nearly 50% of the cosmetics company L'Oreal. L'Oreal was subject to boycott calls from animal rights groups including PeTA because of its animal testing policy. Since then L'Oreal has claimed that it no longer tests finished products on animals. This statement is obviously intended to mislead since finished products do not require further testing and it implies that the ingredients are certainly still subject to tests. Some groups called off the boycott in response to L'Oreals' claims, however there are individuals and organisations who continue the boycott and L'Oreal continues to test on animals.
Nestlé itself manufactures products containing meat and has been critised by BUAV for testing its coffee's carcinogenicity on mice.
I would welcome any more rants, the more the better............
Edited by drivin_me_nuts on Thursday 23 October 22:32
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff